Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

Legitimate Rape leaves Marks but Not Babies....Follow

#152 Aug 28 2012 at 7:50 AM Rating: Good
******
27,272 posts
In an interesting twist, the leader of the small Dutch hardcore Christian political party copied Akin's message. So yeah, we also have the crazy anti abortion/*** marriage/women Christians here, they're just rather insignificant with having only 2/151 seats in the parliament, though as far as I'm aware the only people voting them are the strictly Christian old people and the few Jehovah's witnesses we have here.


The article also mentioned a study from 2009 that stated that 7% of women who are raped get pregnant, of those half get an abortion, a third keeps the child and the rest are miscarriages.
____________________________
Theophany wrote:
YOU'RE AN ELITIST @#%^ AETHIEN, NO WONDER YOU HAVE NO FRIENDS AND PEOPLE HATE YOU.
someproteinguy wrote:
Aethien you take more terrible pictures than a Japanese tourist.
Astarin wrote:
One day, Maz, you'll learn not to click on anything Aeth links.
#153 Aug 28 2012 at 9:07 AM Rating: Excellent
Needs More Smut
Avatar
******
20,434 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
Belkira wrote:
I like that he says that bestiality happens in nature.
If being *** is wrong because it's unnatural, then bestiality is okay because it is? Or is it bestiality isn't okay because it's natural, but then *** would be okay ...

Anyone got a scorecard to keep track of this?


Homosexuality is documented in many species, from bedbugs to bonobos.

Edited, Aug 28th 2012 11:08am by catwho
____________________________
FFXI: Catwho on Bismarck. Once again a top bard on the server: Dardaubla 90 on 1/6/2014
Thayos wrote:
I can't understand anyone who skips the cutscenes of a Final Fantasy game. That's like going to Texas and not getting barbecue.

FFXIV: Katarh Mest on Lamia - Member of The Swarm and leader of Grammarian Tea House chat LS
#154 Aug 28 2012 at 9:38 AM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,048 posts
catwho wrote:
lolgaxe wrote:
Belkira wrote:
I like that he says that bestiality happens in nature.
If being *** is wrong because it's unnatural, then bestiality is okay because it is? Or is it bestiality isn't okay because it's natural, but then *** would be okay ...

Anyone got a scorecard to keep track of this?


Homosexuality is documented in many species, from bedbugs to bonobos.

Edited, Aug 28th 2012 11:08am by catwho

Only the 'b' species?
____________________________
Alma wrote:
Post and be happy!
#155 Aug 28 2012 at 9:40 AM Rating: Excellent
Quote:
Homosexuality is documented in many species, from bedbugs to bonobos.


BUT THEY CAN'T MAKE BABIES SO IT DOESN'T COUNT!
____________________________
"The Rich are there to take all of the money & pay none of the taxes, the middle class is there to do all the work and pay all the taxes, and the poor are there to scare the crap out of the middle class." -George Carlin


#156 Aug 28 2012 at 11:08 AM Rating: Excellent
Annoying Ass
ZAM Administrator
Avatar
*****
11,969 posts
Omegavegeta wrote:
Quote:
Homosexuality is documented in many species, from bedbugs to bonobos.


BUT THEY CAN'T MAKE BABIES SO IT DOESN'T COUNT!

Goats can make kids, though.

So, is goatse ok?
____________________________
Retired News Writer for the ZAM Network
WoW - Aureliano the Insane - level 90 Druid on Sen'Jin
Nanaoki - level 90 Mage on Sen'Jin
#157 Aug 28 2012 at 11:11 AM Rating: Good
******
43,893 posts
Screenshot
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#158 Aug 28 2012 at 12:42 PM Rating: Good
Needs More Smut
Avatar
******
20,434 posts
The sound effects on that, as well as the stunned expression on the kid, are pretty horrifying in the context of this conversation.
____________________________
FFXI: Catwho on Bismarck. Once again a top bard on the server: Dardaubla 90 on 1/6/2014
Thayos wrote:
I can't understand anyone who skips the cutscenes of a Final Fantasy game. That's like going to Texas and not getting barbecue.

FFXIV: Katarh Mest on Lamia - Member of The Swarm and leader of Grammarian Tea House chat LS
#159 Aug 28 2012 at 1:55 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Only if you can read scribble.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#160 Aug 28 2012 at 2:43 PM Rating: Good
Encyclopedia
******
31,738 posts
Elinda wrote:
lolgaxe wrote:


Also, if you were forcibly pushed into the water, don't worry. If it was legitimate pushing, your body will find a way to shut out all the water and survive the drowning.

Virgins float. duh


They also weigh as much as a duck! Smiley: schooled
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#161 Aug 28 2012 at 4:19 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
*****
11,284 posts
gbaji wrote:
Elinda wrote:
lolgaxe wrote:


Also, if you were forcibly pushed into the water, don't worry. If it was legitimate pushing, your body will find a way to shut out all the water and survive the drowning.

Virgins float. duh


They also weigh as much as a duck! Smiley: schooled


That's witches, not virgins. Smiley: schooled
____________________________
Shaowstrike (Retired - FFXI)
91PUP/BLM 86SMN/BST 76DRK
Cooking/Fishing 100


"We don't just borrow words; on occasion, English has pursued other languages down alleyways to beat them unconscious and rifle their pockets for new vocabulary."
— James D. Nicoll
#162 Aug 29 2012 at 7:04 AM Rating: Good
******
43,893 posts
Build a bridge out of 'em.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#163 Aug 29 2012 at 7:10 AM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
******
27,580 posts
Elinda wrote:
lolgaxe wrote:


Also, if you were forcibly pushed into the water, don't worry. If it was legitimate pushing, your body will find a way to shut out all the water and survive the drowning.

Virgins float. duh
Smaller holes?
____________________________
Someone on another forum wrote:
Wow, you've got an awesome writing style.! I really dig the narrator's back story, humor, sarcasm, and the plethora of pop culture references. Altogether a refreshingly different RotR journal (not that I don't like the more traditional ones, mind you).

#164 Aug 29 2012 at 7:14 AM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,048 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
Build a bridge out of 'em.
Somebody would be bound to ***** it up - sinking the whole thing.
____________________________
Alma wrote:
Post and be happy!
#165 Aug 29 2012 at 7:14 AM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,048 posts
The One and Only Poldaran wrote:
Elinda wrote:
lolgaxe wrote:


Also, if you were forcibly pushed into the water, don't worry. If it was legitimate pushing, your body will find a way to shut out all the water and survive the drowning.

Virgins float. duh
Smaller holes?

One-way valves.
____________________________
Alma wrote:
Post and be happy!
#166 Aug 29 2012 at 12:07 PM Rating: Good
Quote:
So, is goatse ok?


Goatse is never ok.
____________________________
"The Rich are there to take all of the money & pay none of the taxes, the middle class is there to do all the work and pay all the taxes, and the poor are there to scare the crap out of the middle class." -George Carlin


#167 Aug 31 2012 at 9:15 AM Rating: Excellent
*****
16,098 posts
Mr. Akin wrote:
"If it's a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down."



Admittedly, I don't know that much about Mr. Akin, but I'm going to go on a limb and assume he is a fairly intelligent guy, appears to be at least modestly successful in life, and an educated articulate guy in his 50's or 60's.


How the fuck did he make it through life living this long believing this tripe? Oh must be a result of abstinence-only education. Good god, this is information known by high school students. What a work of art.


Reap what you sow I guess.

-NW

Edited, Aug 31st 2012 8:17am by NaughtyWord
____________________________
The Pessimist: A person who looks both ways before crossing a one-way street.
#168 Aug 31 2012 at 2:16 PM Rating: Good
Did you ever notify AD of my awesome DingartTM of her? If not, i hereby destroy you with "lasers".
____________________________
Allegory wrote:
Bijou your art is exceptionally creepy. It seems like their should be something menacing about it, yet no such tone is present.
#169 Aug 31 2012 at 2:19 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
***
2,582 posts
NaughtyWord wrote:
Mr. Akin wrote:
"If it's a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down."

Rape what you sow I guess.


Emphasis mine Smiley: lol
____________________________
Dandruffshampoo wrote:
Curses, beaten by Professor stupidopo-opo.
Annabella, Goblin in Disguise wrote:
Stupidmonkey is more organized than a bag of raccoons.
#170gbaji, Posted: Aug 31 2012 at 4:38 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) /shrug
#171 Aug 31 2012 at 4:59 PM Rating: Excellent
Will swallow your soul
******
28,252 posts
I seriously doubt, seriously doubt, sir, that you were taught anything about forcible rape and pregnancy rates in the 70s.

____________________________
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

#172 Aug 31 2012 at 5:04 PM Rating: Good
Worst. Title. Ever!
*****
14,951 posts
Samira wrote:
I seriously doubt, seriously doubt, sir, that you were taught anything about forcible rape and pregnancy rates in the 70s.



He was at a very progressive private religious school.
____________________________
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
#173gbaji, Posted: Aug 31 2012 at 5:25 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Exactly when do you suppose *** education in our public school system began? Your doubts are based on ignorance.
#174 Aug 31 2012 at 5:27 PM Rating: Excellent
******
43,893 posts
Probably about the same time that politics started changing how reproductive organs work.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#175gbaji, Posted: Aug 31 2012 at 5:28 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) And you know what's missing here? Someone actually showing that the statement about the rarity of pregnancy from forcible rape is actually incorrect. Argue every other issue except the key point. The fact is that his statement was not technically wrong. Stupid in the context he used it in (and poorly phrased), but not wrong at all.
#176 Aug 31 2012 at 5:29 PM Rating: Excellent
Will swallow your soul
******
28,252 posts
I don't doubt that you had *** ed. I do doubt the veracity of your claim as to its content.

____________________________
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

#177 Aug 31 2012 at 5:43 PM Rating: Excellent
Sage
****
4,041 posts
gbaji wrote:
And you know what's missing here? Someone actually showing that the statement about the rarity of pregnancy from forcible rape is actually incorrect. Argue every other issue except the key point. The fact is that his statement was not technically wrong. Stupid in the context he used it in (and poorly phrased), but not wrong at all.

Edited, Aug 31st 2012 4:30pm by gbaji


I want to see your cite that says forcible rape rarely results in vaginal penetration.
#178 Aug 31 2012 at 5:44 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
31,738 posts
Samira wrote:
I don't doubt that you had *** ed. I do doubt the veracity of your claim as to its content.


I know this is shocking to some, but *** education in this country used to be far more about the science and facts of reproduction and sexual behavior than it is today. The politics (on both sides) have transformed it into a collection of teachings designed to tie into a given political position on related issues and *not* to teach strong facts about the issue itself. Believe it or not, they did talk about issues like rape, incest, homosexuality, and how those things intersected with pregnancy, STDs, etc even back in grade school. I hit the whole run of *** ed twice because I attended a public grade school, and then went to a religious middle and high school. Public schools taught *** education in 5th and 6th grade back then. The religious school I attended did their first intro stuff in 7th, with the followup in 8th grade.

Couple year difference aside, the information provided was more or less identical in both schools. Yes. Complete with relatively boring films, which seemed the popular education technique of the day.


Young people today like to think they are more progressive, better informed, and more open minded than past generations, but in a lot of ways, they are more coddled, less well educated, and less well exposed to real diversity of ideas than their parents. They just don't realize it. We spend a lot more time and effort talking about how we should handle these subjects, but honestly a lot less actually doing it. This is a general observation btw, not just about *** ed. The same can be said about nearly every subject taught in our education system today. We're so concerned about exposing kids to something too early, or offending their parents, or hurting their fragile sense of self esteem, but we just don't teach them in a factual manner anymore. We no longer expect responsibility from students, so we don't teach them as though they can be responsible enough to handle the lessons. We coddle them and protect them from education. And then we wonder why they don't have a freaking clue how the world works after they graduate.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#179 Aug 31 2012 at 5:51 PM Rating: Good
Sage
****
4,041 posts
gbaji wrote:
Samira wrote:
I don't doubt that you had *** ed. I do doubt the veracity of your claim as to its content.


I know this is shocking to some, but *** education in this country used to be far more about the science and facts of reproduction and sexual behavior than it is today. The politics (on both sides) have transformed it into a collection of teachings designed to tie into a given political position on related issues and *not* to teach strong facts about the issue itself. Believe it or not, they did talk about issues like rape, incest, homosexuality, and how those things intersected with pregnancy, STDs, etc even back in grade school. I hit the whole run of *** ed twice because I attended a public grade school, and then went to a religious middle and high school. Public schools taught *** education in 5th and 6th grade back then. The religious school I attended did their first intro stuff in 7th, with the followup in 8th grade.

Couple year difference aside, the information provided was more or less identical in both schools. Yes. Complete with relatively boring films, which seemed the popular education technique of the day.


Young people today like to think they are more progressive, better informed, and more open minded than past generations, but in a lot of ways, they are more coddled, less well educated, and less well exposed to real diversity of ideas than their parents. They just don't realize it. We spend a lot more time and effort talking about how we should handle these subjects, but honestly a lot less actually doing it. This is a general observation btw, not just about *** ed. The same can be said about nearly every subject taught in our education system today. We're so concerned about exposing kids to something too early, or offending their parents, or hurting their fragile sense of self esteem, but we just don't teach them in a factual manner anymore. We no longer expect responsibility from students, so we don't teach them as though they can be responsible enough to handle the lessons. We coddle them and protect them from education. And then we wonder why they don't have a freaking clue how the world works after they graduate.


What sort of non-biased, science-based information do you think we should be teaching our children in schools?
#180 Aug 31 2012 at 5:53 PM Rating: Good
******
43,893 posts
Heh. "This was taught forty years ago to kids in high school, and since knowledge and understanding of something never changes it's clearly correct."
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#181gbaji, Posted: Aug 31 2012 at 6:02 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) By the *****? Sufficient for ejaculation to occur with any chance at all of a pregnancy resulting? Do I really need to do this? Or can we apply a little common sense here?
#182 Aug 31 2012 at 6:04 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
31,738 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
Heh. "This was taught forty years ago to kids in high school, and since knowledge and understanding of something never changes it's clearly correct."


Yeah. Newton and that whole theory of gravity clearly must be wrong because it's old. Do you really want to play this game? There's a whole range between all and nothing.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#183 Aug 31 2012 at 6:04 PM Rating: Good
******
21,717 posts
gbaji wrote:
And you know what's missing here? Someone actually showing that the statement about the rarity of pregnancy from forcible rape is actually incorrect.


Guess that depends on your definition of rare, doesn't it you ******* imbecile.

Quote:
The national rape-related pregnancy rate is 5.0% per rape among victims of reproductive age (aged 12 to 45); among adult women an estimated 32,101 pregnancies result from rape each year. Among 34 cases of rape-related pregnancy, the majority occurred among adolescents and resulted from assault by a known, often related perpetrator. Only 11.7% of these victims received immediate medical attention after the assault, and 47.1% received no medical attention related to the rape. A total 32.4% of these victims did not discover they were pregnant until they had already entered the second trimester; 32.2% opted to keep the infant whereas 50% underwent abortion and 5.9% placed the infant for adoption; an additional 11.8% had spontaneous abortion.


5% of rape victims become pregnant. Of those 11.7% required immediate medical treatment. Even if we get really ******* conservative and assume that ONLY those 11.7% were forcible rape (which you know is a load of ********** that's still 3,756 pregnancies per year. Even then, that's significant, and not at all rare, but let's look at the numbers again. 11.7% required immediate medical attention, while 47% required no medical attention at all. That means 53% did require medical attention at some point. If we assume even just half of that number is due to forcible rape cases, then we're looking at 26%, or 8,346 pregnancies due to forcible rape per year.

Quote:
And you know what's missing here?


Yes, we all do. One day you'll figure it out.
____________________________
R.I.P. Jessica M. 5/3/2010
This post brought to you by Carl's Jr.
gbaji wrote:
You guys keep tossing facts out there like they mean something.


#184 Aug 31 2012 at 6:05 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
31,738 posts
Guenny wrote:
What sort of non-biased, science-based information do you think we should be teaching our children in schools?


1950s era health films. What else? Smiley: schooled
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#185 Aug 31 2012 at 6:16 PM Rating: Excellent
******
43,893 posts
gbaji wrote:
Newton and that whole theory of gravity clearly must be wrong because it's old.
Yeah, turns out that over the past 300 plus years that theory has gone through a couple of changes and didn't just sit there as absolute fact.
gbaji wrote:
Do you really want to play this game?
I'd love to play with a second player instead of solo, but there isn't anyone around. Smiley: frown
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#186 Aug 31 2012 at 6:29 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
31,738 posts
BrownDuck wrote:
gbaji wrote:
And you know what's missing here? Someone actually showing that the statement about the rarity of pregnancy from forcible rape is actually incorrect.


Guess that depends on your definition of rare, doesn't it you @#%^ing imbecile.


Also might help to not quote a pretty questionable study on the issue. Not your fault though, those numbers are widely reported. Anyone who steps back and looks at the statistics of human reproduction should instantly realize that either this study was horribly flawed, or the reported statistics were measured differently than most think they were.

I'll give you a hint: Go look up the normal rate of impregnation among fertile couples actually trying to conceive if they have *** one time at a random point during a woman's cycle. Then ask where the **** the 5% number comes from. In real science, you should always check your results to ensure they make a **** bit of sense.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#187 Aug 31 2012 at 6:44 PM Rating: Excellent
***
1,877 posts
gbaji wrote:
Guenny wrote:
gbaji wrote:
And you know what's missing here? Someone actually showing that the statement about the rarity of pregnancy from forcible rape is actually incorrect. Argue every other issue except the key point. The fact is that his statement was not technically wrong. Stupid in the context he used it in (and poorly phrased), but not wrong at all.

Edited, Aug 31st 2012 4:30pm by gbaji


I want to see your cite that says forcible rape rarely results in vaginal penetration.


Do I really need to do this?


Yeah for once let's see a cite. Smiley: nod
____________________________
#swaggerjacker
#188 Aug 31 2012 at 6:58 PM Rating: Excellent
Cervixhouse-Five
******
30,643 posts
It's obvious that when a woman doesn't want to get knocked up she doesn't. Duh.
#189 Aug 31 2012 at 7:22 PM Rating: Excellent
Dude said something factually wrong. Regardless of how pro-life he is, Akin spouted factually incorrect information. Women can't magically abort rape babies, no matter the rhetoric one believes.

Edited, Aug 31st 2012 9:24pm by Omegavegeta
____________________________
"The Rich are there to take all of the money & pay none of the taxes, the middle class is there to do all the work and pay all the taxes, and the poor are there to scare the crap out of the middle class." -George Carlin


#190 Aug 31 2012 at 7:50 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
31,738 posts
Criminy wrote:
gbaji wrote:
Guenny wrote:
gbaji wrote:
And you know what's missing here? Someone actually showing that the statement about the rarity of pregnancy from forcible rape is actually incorrect. Argue every other issue except the key point. The fact is that his statement was not technically wrong. Stupid in the context he used it in (and poorly phrased), but not wrong at all.

Edited, Aug 31st 2012 4:30pm by gbaji


I want to see your cite that says forcible rape rarely results in vaginal penetration.


Do I really need to do this?


Yeah for once let's see a cite. Smiley: nod


I'll repeat again (for the common sense impaired):

gbaji wrote:
By the *****? Sufficient for ejaculation to occur with any chance at all of a pregnancy resulting? Do I really need to do this? Or can we apply a little common sense here?



When compared to the entire spectrum of what is called "rape", that represents an incredibly small portion. Does it really require a whole lot of brain power to realize that if the total quoted rate of pregnancy for the whole group is X, and that group includes a whole lot of 15 year olds having *** (repeatedly over a period of time btw, which for those following along is why the stats are so skewed) with their adult boyfriends, that the actual rate for forcible rape is going to be significantly lower than that. Same deal with non-forcible date rape, which usually involves multiple instances of sexual intercourse over a period of time.

When you distill that down into a "percentage of women impregnated by their rapists", you're going to end out with a **** of a lot higher percentage when you include those other two groups. Sometimes, just looking at the cases themselves can tell you how the distribution is going to end out. This is one of those cases.


Let me be absolutely clear. I'm not saying that this doesn't happen. I fully acknowledge that the odds are greater than zero, and thus the argument as a whole was stupid. However, the statement that pregnancy resulting from forcible rape is relatively rare is absolutely true. Compared to other forms of rape, it's true. Compared to sexual activity in general, it's true. I do find it amusing that for some people, the need to attack anything said that even remotely appears to question some political agenda they agree with is so strong. It's almost Pavlovian. Heaven forbid anyone mention that you're less likely to get pregnant from a forcible rape than having consensual *** with your boy friend. Doesn't matter that it's quite obviously true, it's language that might just slightly weaken some contrived connections between social issues we like to use, so make sure to attack that person right away!!!


I just find the whole thing to be dumb.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#191 Aug 31 2012 at 7:54 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
31,738 posts
Omegavegeta wrote:
Dude said something factually wrong. Regardless of how pro-life he is, Akin spouted factually incorrect information. Women can't magically abort rape babies, no matter the rhetoric one believes.


Not what he said, but just because it's amusing:

Quote:
Only 11.7% of these victims received immediate medical attention after the assault, and 47.1% received no medical attention related to the rape. A total 32.4% of these victims did not discover they were pregnant until they had already entered the second trimester; 32.2% opted to keep the infant whereas 50% underwent abortion and 5.9% placed the infant for adoption; an additional 11.8% had spontaneous abortion.


If we follow the earlier assumption that the 11.7% are those who suffered forcible rapes (which would presumably *all* involve immediate medical attention), then clearly forcible rapes *do* result in spontaneous abortion. He's right! Why did we ever doubt him? Oh... The humanity. Smiley: lol
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#192 Aug 31 2012 at 8:08 PM Rating: Excellent
***
1,877 posts
gbaji wrote:

I'll repeat again (for the common sense impaired):

gbaji wrote:
By the *****? Sufficient for ejaculation to occur with any chance at all of a pregnancy resulting? Do I really need to do this? Or can we apply a little common sense here?



When compared to the entire spectrum of what is called "rape", that represents an incredibly small portion. Does it really require a whole lot of brain power to realize that if the total quoted rate of pregnancy for the whole group is X, and that group includes a whole lot of 15 year olds having *** (repeatedly over a period of time btw, which for those following along is why the stats are so skewed) with their adult boyfriends, that the actual rate for forcible rape is going to be significantly lower than that. Same deal with non-forcible date rape, which usually involves multiple instances of sexual intercourse over a period of time.

When you distill that down into a "percentage of women impregnated by their rapists", you're going to end out with a **** of a lot higher percentage when you include those other two groups. Sometimes, just looking at the cases themselves can tell you how the distribution is going to end out. This is one of those cases.


Let me be absolutely clear. I'm not saying that this doesn't happen. I fully acknowledge that the odds are greater than zero, and thus the argument as a whole was stupid. However, the statement that pregnancy resulting from forcible rape is relatively rare is absolutely true. Compared to other forms of rape, it's true. Compared to sexual activity in general, it's true. I do find it amusing that for some people, the need to attack anything said that even remotely appears to question some political agenda they agree with is so strong. It's almost Pavlovian. Heaven forbid anyone mention that you're less likely to get pregnant from a forcible rape than having consensual *** with your boy friend. Doesn't matter that it's quite obviously true, it's language that might just slightly weaken some contrived connections between social issues we like to use, so make sure to attack that person right away!!!


I just find the whole thing to be dumb.


For someone who claims others lack common sense you sure have a funny way of citing a reference. I will give you a tip, it involves quoting people that don't exist in your head and showing links to their work. Otherwise good work! Glad to see you have an ability to consistently type walls of text without actually saying a dang thing. Smiley: thumbsup
____________________________
#swaggerjacker
#193 Aug 31 2012 at 8:21 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
It's just obvious.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#194 Aug 31 2012 at 8:36 PM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
*****
11,991 posts
That Liberals are building abortion factories in unwed mothers?
____________________________
Just as Planned.
#195 Aug 31 2012 at 8:37 PM Rating: Good
***
1,877 posts
Of course it is. Smiley: tongue I am still holding out for the day that Gbaji will make a good devils advocate and at least bring some solid evidence to back up some of his claims. Instead of the usual essay long posts with about as much substance as a eighth graders English assignment on what they did during the summer.
____________________________
#swaggerjacker
#196 Aug 31 2012 at 8:40 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
*****
11,284 posts
Timelordwho wrote:
That Liberals are building abortion factories in unwed mothers?


How else will they fulfill their quota of Stem Cells?
____________________________
Shaowstrike (Retired - FFXI)
91PUP/BLM 86SMN/BST 76DRK
Cooking/Fishing 100


"We don't just borrow words; on occasion, English has pursued other languages down alleyways to beat them unconscious and rifle their pockets for new vocabulary."
— James D. Nicoll
#197 Aug 31 2012 at 9:16 PM Rating: Excellent
Gurue
*****
16,289 posts
I think it's freaky that in gbaji's school, they taught forcible rape and its consequences.
#198 Aug 31 2012 at 11:41 PM Rating: Good
Cervixhouse-Five
******
30,643 posts
Jophiel wrote:
It's just obvious.


Smiley: glare
#199 Sep 01 2012 at 12:51 AM Rating: Excellent
Akin wrote:
“If it’s a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut the whole thing down.”


That is factually & scientifically incorrect information & he believes that, most likely, because of rhetoric.
____________________________
"The Rich are there to take all of the money & pay none of the taxes, the middle class is there to do all the work and pay all the taxes, and the poor are there to scare the crap out of the middle class." -George Carlin


#200 Sep 01 2012 at 1:42 AM Rating: Excellent
Everyone's Oiran
Avatar
*****
15,921 posts
Dear gbaji
Quote:
The national rape-related pregnancy rate is 5.0% per rape among victims of reproductive age (aged 12 to 45); among adult women an estimated 32,101 pregnancies result from rape each year.

I had a lot more to say, but really, it makes me feel ill to try and argue with you about this. The damage to adopted children the majority of whom wonder over and over "Why didn't my mother want me?" even when their adoptive parents are full of love and care. The damage to children and adults who get traumatised when they find out they were the product of rape, whether or not their mothers kept them. The damage to women who can't bear the thought of carrying and creating a child from the man who violated, victimised and traumatised her. If teens are more likely than adult women to be made pregnant from rape it's probably because they haven't had the chance to be on birth control pills. And they are more likely to be the rape victims of their fathers, brothers, uncles or other relatives. WTF makes you think it's acceptable at all to force a child to be completed who will almost invariably be damaged for life because of the manner of their conception?

You aren't saving a life when you save a rape foetus. You are creating a damaged human being who otherwise would have had no idea what it was missing out on, good AND bad.

@#%^ you you sick piece of sh*t.

Yes, I really admire the woman who can separate out the feelings she has for her attacker from the feelings she has for her foetus and child. Hopefully that strength and grace fills the child's childhood and she will be a great parent. Unfortunately in my case, my raped mother was so stressed and traumatised, she made a lousy mother. Too bad I reminded her so much of him.

Edited, Sep 1st 2012 3:54am by Aripyanfar
____________________________
<3

http://www.reddit.com/r/Forum4/
#201 Sep 01 2012 at 5:15 AM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,048 posts
gbaji wrote:

I just find the whole thing to be dumb.

You mean especially allowing raped women to abort their unwanted child is dumb because it's such a rare occurrence? Yeah, it would be stupid to make an whole exemption to a big-brother law just because the women claims the guy forced his **** into her.

It's a good thing abortion is legal.
____________________________
Alma wrote:
Post and be happy!
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 66 All times are in CDT
angrymnk, Poldaran, TirithRR, Xsarus, Yodabunny, Anonymous Guests (61)